1996-03-04 - RE: FW: Communications Decency Act (hee-hee)

Header Data

From: blanc <blancw@accessone.com>
To: “‘Timothy C. May’” <tcmay@got.net>
Message Hash: 809f65be8edd51600aed9baa1d15c1f1161113500b37a86329934820253d5f79
Message ID: <01BB094A.D39E08C0@blancw.accessone.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-03-04 07:12:02 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 15:12:02 +0800

Raw message

From: blanc <blancw@accessone.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 1996 15:12:02 +0800
To: "'Timothy C. May'" <tcmay@got.net>
Subject: RE: FW: Communications Decency Act (hee-hee)
Message-ID: <01BB094A.D39E08C0@blancw.accessone.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


From: 	Timothy C. May

This is of course an old idea. Regrettably, the CDA is not based on a
simple bright line test invovling the "Seven [exonized] Words,"
immortalized in the FCC--Carlin--Pacifica case. Rather, "indecent" is
broadly interpreted to mean essentially whatever a prosecutor can convince
a panel of bluenosed citizens is indecent.
....................................................................

Well, if you were prosecuted, you could always explain what it means to kiss your "Gingrich" by pointing to any part of your body you choose.

Of course they would be indicating, by their accusations, that they know enough about indecency to become suspicious over the resemblance....

(such sensitive people)

    ..
Blanc





Thread